Help with my diamond tactic?

[ReadingFan82]

Hello whoever reads this,

I just had a few questions about what you thought might be going wrong for my tactic I'm using on my Everton save. I finished 5th in the league after adopting this with about half of my league games left so it clearly isn't a total disaster, but I am having some problems with it. I've had some good results against the bigger teams in the league, such as beating Arsenal 3-0 at home, beating Chelsea 2-0 at home, beating Spurs 2-1 away and beating Chelsea 1-0 away. However, I'm having some issues beating a few of the lesser down teams, having scraped past Burnley at home, drawing at home to both Leeds and Aston Villa, and losing to both Burnley and Villa away, with the defeat to Villa meaning I finished 2 points outside the top 4, if I'd won I'd have qualified for the champions league, but bottled it.

I've also noticed a specific issue where my players try a lot of long balls up top with little to no success, giving the ball away a lot and getting countered, despite having the passing length set to standard. My keeper also tends to just boot the ball long even though I have it set to distributed to the full backs rather than telling him to punt it long and I'm not quite sure what to about that either. Obviously with this there is also loads of space out wide for opposition players but that's just a given when using a tactic like this due having no wingers/wide midfielders.

A completely general thing is that I don't think I've scored from a set piece all season, I have no idea whats going on with that whether its something for everyone but some help on how to make my team more effective from those situations would also be really appreciated too.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

 

2 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

If you have managed to achieve so good results and finished 5th with a tactic as unbalanced as this one, then you should definitely be more than delighted with your achievement (in all honesty). 

[ReadingFan82]

37 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

 

If you have managed to achieve so good results and finished 5th with a tactic as unbalanced as this one, then you should definitely be more than delighted with your achievement (in all honesty). 

Would you please be able to explain to me why you think this tactic is so unbalanced? Could be quite helpful in trying to figure out why I seem to do quite poorly against certain teams? As I said I was happy with my finish just frustrated that I failed to win a number of games that I thought I should have won and with just general inconsistencies with my team.

[MadOnion]

Are your fullbacks being marked out when your keeper is trying to pass to them? I'd suggest also  asking your keeper to take short kicks.

If you're struggling against the lesser teams and since you're playing pass into space, is there space to pass to?

I'm generally not a fan of the BWM as a DM but since you're not conceding too many I'd say that's ok. Typically I prefer a role that doesn't roam.

Edited November 18, 2020 by MadOnion

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

Would you please be able to explain to me why you think this tactic is so unbalanced?

Just look at both your flanks: on the right, you have an attack-minded fullback role behind an attacking mezzala; on the left, you have a roaming midfield runner (BBM) and a WB on attack duty behind him. These 2 elements alone make the tactic unbalanced, not to mention some other (smaller) issues.

But as I said, your results are really good, so there is no need to make changes to your tactic (at least for the time being)  

[koikingu]

I play the same formation with only slightly different roles (much less attacking and roaming, like others have said), and have the same issue of overperforming against strong teams, and struggling to put away weaker opposition (playing Schalke, beat Bayern in the league but lost twice to relegated Arminia Bielefeld).

 

Basically, the issue is that the tactic is very counter attacking, so it works when a team comes at you and leaves space to exploit. It breaks down against weaker teams because those tend to defend lower and narrower, so there is no space to exploit, and all your players are concentrated in the part of the pitch they are defending in.

 

Basically, you need some variation for creating space against the Burnleys of the world. I tend to make the midfield duties more supporting, and have my wingbacks on attack against weaker sides to create some width in attack, and also turn off pass into space and turn down the tempo so the players look a bit more patiently for openings. In squad building, I also spent the biggest part of the budget on getting great attacking wingbacks, since their performance is even more key than usual in this set up. (I'd probably make upgrading right back the no.1 priority in the next window).

[Bigpapa42]

ED has a great point - if things are working and you are overachieving to expectations.... that can't be underplayed.

But in terms of balance... to flip it around on you, where do you think the balance is coming from? Analyzing a tactic doesn't take innate knowledge - you just have to look at things and consider what they offer versus what you trying to accomplish, and watch when things unfold. 

Of the 10 outfield players, 5 are on attack. That's half of your squad. Both forwards, half your midfield, and a quarter of your defense will be focused on attacking, getting forward, and being aggressive. They will contribute less to the defensive phase. to an extent, you are trying to defend with 5 players only (keep aside, obviously). The 5 on attack won't be as singularly focused as they would if you had a more aggressive mentality, but its still pretty gung-ho. 

I'm not sure the Team Instructions necessarily match what your shape is. I mean, you want to focus play out wide but you only have a single player on each flank. they are also looking for overlap... but who is going to go out wide and allow for that? The Mezzala will some, but with an Attack mentality, I'm not sure how much he's going to hold up play. And when you WBs have the ball up wide far up the field, what is the plan from there? 

You have a central playmaker in the hole, but you TI is basically asking him to be bypassed with wide play. I'm wondering if he does get the ball once everyone is forward and he's not having clear passing options. Plus you've asked him to put the ball out wide....

In terms of firing off long passes... When that happens, what other passing options do the players have? Because I can easily see the WBs having the ball and looking to keep it wide but having no one to go out wide to. Your forwards and AM are not coming back to support. You are also asking them to do things at Higher Tempo, which means they are having to make make decisions fast. All but the very elite players are going to struggle to do that consistently. If your shape, roles, and Team Instructions don't work together to provide passing options, poor decisions are going to result. 

Some great advice I've seen on here many a team (Cleon? Rashidii?) is to think about how you want your players to defend. Think about the plan. How do you want to attack? How do you want goals to happen? Plan around that. 

[ReadingFan82]

2 hours ago, MadOnion said:

Are your fullbacks being marked out when your keeper is trying to pass to them? I'd suggest also asking your keeper to take short kicks.

If you're struggling against the lesser teams and since you're playing pass into space, is there space to pass to?

I'm generally not a fan of the BWM as a DM but since you're not conceding too I'd say that's ok. Typically I prefer a role that doesn't roam.

That is a possibility yes, I will try to keep a closer eye on this in my next few games and I will put short kicks on also.

That's also a very good point, against lesser teams who are more likely to sit back and just defend I'll try taking that off to try and stop the needless losses of possession I've been saying.

I've never thought too much about that, is there role that you would suggest would suit my team better than that? Also I'm pretty sure that when on defend the BWM doesn't roam but instead tries to hold just in front of the defense but I'm not 100% sure on that one.

[ReadingFan82]

1 hour ago, Experienced Defender said:

Just look at both your flanks: on the right, you have an attack-minded fullback role behind an attacking mezzala; on the left, you have a roaming midfield runner (BBM) and a WB on attack duty behind him. These 2 elements alone make the tactic unbalanced, not to mention some other (smaller) issues.

But as I said, your results are really good, so there is no need to make changes to your tactic (at least for the time being)  

Is there any ways you would suggest I could make this a tad more balance without completely changing up my system? Maybe changing the B2B to a CM on support duty, or the mezzela to  support duty, or the RWB to defend from support perhaps? Something like that to make it just a tad more balanced perhaps?

[MadOnion]

10 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

That is a possibility yes, I will try to keep a closer eye on this in my next few games and I will put short kicks on also.

That's also a very good point, against lesser teams who are more likely to sit back and just defend I'll try taking that off to try and stop the needless losses of possession I've been saying.

I've never thought too much about that, is there role that you would suggest would suit my team better than that? Also I'm pretty sure that when on defend the BWM doesn't roam but instead tries to hold just in front of the defense but I'm not 100% sure on that one.

I'd watch the first 10-15min in full first to understand what's going on. I'd pay attention to the GK and fullbacks only. Are they doing what you want them to do? I also just noticed you're playing a SK-A and his mentality will be quite high so that could explain the long balls (risk).

The DM position depends on what you want him to do. Give him a DM role first and see if you need additional tasks (using the same approach outlined above).
Last year I was a big fan of the HB against the big boys but that can be quite aggressive. My preference is a deeper playmaker, but you have a special player further forward in James Rodriguez.

Against lesser you can either be more patient or aggressive (pressure cooker), sometimes you can try both strategies within the same game.

[Experienced Defender]

11 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

Is there any ways you would suggest I could make this a tad more balance without completely changing up my system?

Depends on the style of football you want to play. Your instructions as well as forward duties suggest a counter-attacking style, but I don't know if that actually was your intention or you just set it up like that inadvertently?

Anyway, if you do want a counter-attacking style, then the narrow 442 diamond is not an optimal choice of formation. 

[ReadingFan82]

58 minutes ago, MadOnion said:

I'd watch the first 10-15min in full first to understand what's going on. I'd pay attention to the GK and fullbacks only. Are they doing what you want them to do? I also just noticed you're playing a SK-A and his mentality will be quite high so that could explain the long balls (risk).

The DM position depends on what you want him to do. Give him a DM role first and see if you need additional tasks (using the same approach outlined above).
Last year I was a big fan of the HB against the big boys but that can be quite aggressive. My preference is a deeper playmaker, but you have a special player further forward in James Rodriguez.

Against lesser you can either be more patient or aggressive (pressure cooker), sometimes you can try both strategies within the same game.

Oh I didn't even think about that with the GK that's a good idea I'd try that out also.

Yeah I kinda just want a player to hover in the area just in front of the defense to try and cut out getting carved open too easily by opponents, would a half back or a standard DM be a bit better for that do you think?

And yes James is a little bit special.

That could be a good idea. My problem seems to be that I have issues playing against the lesser sides so changing it too be able to hold onto the ball a little bit better, lower tempo, work ball into box, shorter passing, etc etc

[ReadingFan82]

46 minutes ago, Experienced Defender said:

Depends on the style of football you want to play. Your instructions as well as forward duties suggest a counter-attacking style, but I don't know if that actually was your intention or you just set it up like that inadvertently?

Anyway, if you do want a counter-attacking style, then the narrow 442 diamond is not an optimal choice of formation. 

To be honest I've never thought of it that way really but looking at it I guess your right. It seems to work very well against the bigger sides as they actually try to attack you, but obviously the smaller sides don't give me a whole lot to counter at so having a second tactic to go at those teams with could be a good idea.

Do you have any suggestions for what formation could be a bit better for me? It has seemed to work quite well for me so far against the so-called top 6 as it means I always have 2 up front for the ball to be played long too often with James just behind if he isn't the one playing the pass. 

[MadOnion]

2 hours ago, Experienced Defender said:

Anyway, if you do want a counter-attacking style, then the narrow 442 diamond is not an optimal choice of formation. 

This is obviously your opinion but I would elaborate if I were you. It's not that black and white.

One thing is a playing style, another thing is a formation. The same formation can execute different playing styles.

It looks as though the OP showed success against top sides, who are likely to give up space, so with those TIs couple with the roles, I'd say counter attacking football is on. What he is struggling with is against the lesser sides where he, perhaps, needs a slightly different style. @ReadingFan82 correct me if I'm wrong.

[Experienced Defender]

2 hours ago, ReadingFan82 said:

Do you have any suggestions for what formation could be a bit better for me? 

Given the team you are managing (Everton), perhaps the 4231 could be a good choice (4123 wide should also work fine). But more important than the formation you opt for is how you set up the tactic within that formation. 

[Experienced Defender]

1 hour ago, MadOnion said:

One thing is a playing style, another thing is a formation. The same formation can execute different playing styles

Absolutely, But certain formations are more suitable for certain styles, whereas others are better suited to different ones. Formation and style of play are different things, but they are not unrelated. 

[raktim0699]

Hi, I am not an Expert like others and rarely used any diamond formations, but I was thinking of experimenting with a diamond tactic for the last couple of days. The reason is simple: they have so many players in the middle it would be hard to overwhelm us and have the option of width coming from full-back as they can get further forward. Even during transitions, since we have two forwards and one attacking midfielder behind, we will be dangerous on the counter. So, I experimented with the following blend of roles and duties.

                                                                          AF (A)   TM (S)

                                                                                   AM (S)

                                                                         DLP (S)     MEZ (A)

                                                                                   HB (D)

                                                                IWB (A) CD (S) BPD (D) WB (S)

With ajax it has worked well for my liking and players linked well and if you like you can give it a try and let me know